What's new

Type 00X/003 (former Type 002) Aircraft Carrier News & Discussions

Genesis

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2013
4,601
24
7,500
Country
China
Location
China
While I don't think going the steam route is a good use of time, but our guys did train on the Brazilian carrier. If they sold us that tech, then it is a time saving good way to do it.

However, I'm not sure about the Authenticity of this. But if it is true, it would catapult, pun intended, us into undisputed second most powerful navy in the world bar none.
 

ChineseTiger1986

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 27, 2010
23,336
12
41,622
Country
China
Location
Canada
While I don't think going the steam route is a good use of time, but our guys did train on the Brazilian carrier. If they sold us that tech, then it is a time saving good way to do it.

However, I'm not sure about the Authenticity of this. But if it is true, it would catapult, pun intended, us into undisputed second most powerful navy in the world bar none.

The rumor has been proved to be false.

And POP3 is one of the most reliable military insiders when it comes to the aircraft carrier and destroyer.
 
Last edited:

Genesis

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2013
4,601
24
7,500
Country
China
Location
China
The rumor has been proved to be false.

And POP3 is one of the most reliable military insider when it comes to the aircraft carrier and destroyer.

cool, I guess full combat readiness by 2020 is a very realist target.

I assume not nuclear? OR maybe it has to be nuclear to power it. We will see. Either way, good development. The one thing our navy lacks is carriers and within 10 years we get three.

Now the ball is in J-15 and J-31's court. As well as on deck AEW, and other helicopter programs.
 

ChineseTiger1986

ELITE MEMBER
Jan 27, 2010
23,336
12
41,622
Country
China
Location
Canada
cool, I guess full combat readiness by 2020 is a very realist target.

I assume not nuclear? OR maybe it has to be nuclear to power it. We will see. Either way, good development. The one thing our navy lacks is carriers and within 10 years we get three.

Now the ball is in J-15 and J-31's court. As well as on deck AEW, and other helicopter programs.

Not nuclear for now, the 110000 tons nuclear supercarrier will start the construction after 2020.

The Type 001A is the further improvement of Liaoning, while the Type 002 is a modernized version of the Kitty Hawk class.
 
Last edited:

Sasquatch

RETIRED INTL MOD
Oct 29, 2011
4,344
6
4,822
Country
China
Location
China
While I don't think going the steam route is a good use of time, but our guys did train on the Brazilian carrier. If they sold us that tech, then it is a time saving good way to do it.
.

First to carriers are going to be fitted with steam believe it, EMALS will be fitted on the Type 003. I was hoping they skip it as steam catapults are expensive.

However, I'm not sure about the Authenticity of this. But if it is true, it would catapult, pun intended, us into undisputed second most powerful navy in the world bar none

Your wrong on this. It's going to take 5-10 years before the PLAN can even match the Royal or French Navy forget about being the second best.
 

Akasa

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 9, 2008
7,223
9
5,418
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Your wrong on this. It's going to take 5-10 years before the PLAN can even match the Royal or French Navy forget about being the second best.

France's and UK's navies are not toe to toe with China's navy in numbers, projection, or firepower. The only threat besides the US' navy would be that of Japan. Others don't come near.
 

Genesis

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 26, 2013
4,601
24
7,500
Country
China
Location
China
We need CGIs.
Some imaginings, I'm thinking none will be it, but it's a carrier, it's close, at least with some of it.


095109_495.jpg
200907221436523526.jpg
Img264084670.jpg
u=3020342344,251894403&fm=11&gp=0.jpg
H42D1J1GIF2C3715A4.jpg
001d6067643f11394b1e43.jpg
300220_092228958000_2.jpg
1236144791663_39813.jpg
 

Juice

SENIOR MEMBER
Feb 9, 2010
4,018
-1
2,979
Country
United States
Location
United States
While I don't think going the steam route is a good use of time, but our guys did train on the Brazilian carrier. If they sold us that tech, then it is a time saving good way to do it.

However, I'm not sure about the Authenticity of this. But if it is true, it would catapult, pun intended, us into undisputed second most powerful navy in the world bar none.
I only gave you the thanks because a good pun earns it.

Some imaginings, I'm thinking none will be it, but it's a carrier, it's close, at least with some of it.


095109_495.jpg
200907221436523526.jpg
Img264084670.jpg
u=3020342344,251894403&fm=11&gp=0.jpg
H42D1J1GIF2C3715A4.jpg
001d6067643f11394b1e43.jpg
300220_092228958000_2.jpg
1236144791663_39813.jpg
Really nice But am I the only one who noticed not one of those pics relates to the other? Swooped down nose in one, copy-paste American in the other? We have sci-fi illustrators too! (oops....just realized the poster mentioned that these were concepts....sorry)
 

Sasquatch

RETIRED INTL MOD
Oct 29, 2011
4,344
6
4,822
Country
China
Location
China
France's and UK's navies are not toe to toe with China's navy in numbers, projection, or firepower. The only threat besides the US' navy would be that of Japan. Others don't come near.

Both the Royal and French Navy are better trained and more experienced. They can project power way beyond their respective sealines. The Royal Navy was sent 8000 miles to fight in the Falklands, France can project power all the way into the Persian Gulf and most recently Syria. Neither Japan nor the PLAN have this capability, even Russian Kuznetsov has a better power projection than the PLAN. I'm being a realist, the PLAN may not face the royal or french navy but they have a greater capability than the PLAN.

We need CGIs.

Type 001 Upgraded Liaoning > Type 002 Kitty Hawk > Type 003 Nimitz.
 

Akasa

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 9, 2008
7,223
9
5,418
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Both the Royal and French Navy are better trained and more experienced. They can project power way beyond their respective sealines. The Royal Navy was sent 8000 miles to fight in the Falklands, France can project power all the way into the Persian Gulf and most recently Syria.

Europe's projection of power is due to their control of foreign based naval bases. That is a merit of their foreign policy, not military capability. China has significantly more dominant amphibious and long legged assets than the aforementioned nations.

Neither Japan nor the PLAN have this capability,

False. China has more amphibious vessels, bigger ones, as well as greater number of observational and offensive assets to support them.

even Russian Kuznetsov has a better power projection than the PLAN.

How so? Is it with the Kuznetsov's weaker radars, older engines, or obsolete aircraft?

I'm being a realist, the PLAN may not face the royal or french navy but they have a greater capability than the PLAN.

"Realist" is the least suitable term to describe this.
 

Sasquatch

RETIRED INTL MOD
Oct 29, 2011
4,344
6
4,822
Country
China
Location
China
Europe's projection of power is due to their control of foreign based naval bases. That is a merit of their foreign policy, not military capability. China has significantly more dominant amphibious and long legged assets than the aforementioned nations.

Having bases alone doesn't give them capability they still have to use support ships to maintain that capability overseas it does have a military factor in it. There are areas in which the PLAN is more dominant but overall still behind both navies.

False. China has more amphibious vessels, bigger ones, as well as greater number of observational and offensive assets to support them.
But in terms of training and experience China is behind both navies and behind or on par with Japan, what I mean is neither China nor Japan have the projection capability.

How so? Is it with the Kuznetsov's weaker radars, older engines, or obsolete aircraft?

What I'm saying is Kuznetsov still has a greater power projection capability despite it's shortcoming than the PLAN. As of now China's Navy remains regional. The Liaoning itself has problems, carrying heavy weapons on the J-15 and being a ski jump carrier. Its a better carrier than the Kuznetsov.


"Realist" is the least suitable term to describe this.

Call me a skeptic, but I'm open to a wider perspective, could the PLAN overtake the Royal & French Navy yes right now no.
 

Akasa

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 9, 2008
7,223
9
5,418
Country
Canada
Location
Canada
Having bases alone doesn't give them capability they still have to use support ships to maintain that capability overseas it does have a military factor in it. There are areas in which the PLAN is more dominant but overall still behind both navies.

And guess what, China has auxiliary ships as well, and in greater numbers. As said before, the abilities of the UK and French navies to carry out long legged missions are spurred by their lease or ownership of foreign military bases. That is a quality of their geopolitics, not technical military capability. In fact, China at one point considered expanding put to thirteen overseas military bases. In purely military terms, the navies of UK and France are exceedingly overwhelmed by that of China, in terms of firepower, quantity, supports, and in some areas technology.


But in terms of training and experience China is behind both navies and behind or on par with Japan, what I mean is neither China nor Japan have the projection capability.

And unless people actually know the experience of the Chinese navy, that statement is unsubstantiated at best.



What I'm saying is Kuznetsov still has a greater power projection capability despite it's shortcoming than the PLAN. As of now China's Navy remains regional. The Liaoning itself has problems, carrying heavy weapons on the J-15 and being a ski jump carrier. Its a better carrier than the Kuznetsov.

How? The Liaoning has the same displacement as well as superior sensors, more capable jets, newer subsystems, and enlarged internal space.




Call me a skeptic, but I'm open to a wider perspective, could the PLAN overtake the Royal & French Navy yes right now no.

Be a skeptic. However, it would be illogical to do so on the basis of very wrong assumptions and lack of common judgment.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom